I’m sorry that happened. People should be able to have a real discussion about issues without attacking common sense.

So in that case you would be the contrarian that this post is talking about. It’s almost as though critical thinking is good. Reactionaries may be the most vocal and abundant people on some posts, but that doesn’t mean they are right or willing to take a good look and discuss the topic at hand

Maybe they believe that the supreme court is more influenced by money than ideology?

There is zero mention of any antisemitism anywhere in the article. It’s college kids being against what is happening in Gaza. I fail to see how criticism of a military occupation is equal to antisemitism.

The big thing that the article points to in quotes is Intifada which is kind of a call for civil unrest written on a sign. Intifada roots are from Palestinians protesting the occupation after Israel killed 4 civilians in what is many suspect was deliberate retaliation that went on for 5 years (1987-1993).

In 1921 the first vaccine for tuberculosis came out. In 2021 1.6 million people died from tuberculosis.

The medicine existing is great, but something tells me the people who need won’t be getting it.

Israel has had a very loose criteria for military targets if you take a look at recent history. I think you bring up a major point.

Considering Netanyahu just said he would attack foreign aid for Palestine. Israel’s actions like the IDF sniping kids in convenience stores, and taking shots at the Japanese medical personnel during the cease fire of operation pillar of defense/cloud, and targeting media offices should call into question, what does Israel consider a military target?